From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 08:17:56 2002
Received: from ms.databack.com (ms.databack.com [204.245.195.28])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E14195ADF
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BYRON4100.databack.com (130-94-161-164-dsl.hevanet.com [130.94.161.164])
by ms.databack.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5FFHJw94673
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
X-Sender: bklunz@204.245.195.28
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:18 -0700
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Byron Lunz
Subject: re-appearing old mail?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/1
X-Sequence-Number: 245
Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on discussion lists
(or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)?
I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 or 5 days
ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon investigation, the only
common element I noticed was that each such message had numerous Received:
headers, one of which was from rr.com. Examples from three different messages:
Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53])
Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55])
Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with
It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are regurgitating old
messages, which then are treated as new posts upon arrival at our
mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this problem or know for sure the source
of these mails?
--
Byron Lunz
DataBack Systems LLC
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 09:12:43 2002
Received: from out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.3.120])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D262E195ACB
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 09:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail4.mx.voyager.net (mail4.mx.voyager.net [216.93.66.203])
by out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.12.3/8.11.4/1.7) with ESMTP id g5FGCEqT011830;
Sat, 15 Jun 2002 11:12:14 -0500
Received: from 0pbza.erinet.com (d68.as0.wlmg.oh.voyager.net [207.90.89.69])
by mail4.mx.voyager.net (8.11.6/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g5FGCCE53247;
Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:12:12 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20020615120956.02374e70@pop3.norton.antivirus>
X-Sender: peress/mail.erinet.com@pop3.norton.antivirus
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:12:10 -0400
To: Byron Lunz , list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Nancy Peress
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/2
X-Sequence-Number: 246
At 08:17 AM 6/15/2002 -0700, Byron Lunz wrote:
>Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on
>discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)?
Yes, I'm noticing the same phenomenon, and the origin is also
nc.rr.com in every case.
Best regards,
Nancy Peress
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 10:58:54 2002
Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11BD195B27
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:58:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from isdn1-14.connext.net (isdn1-14.connext.net [216.4.158.174])
by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0GXR00J1PDXCDD@eListX.com>
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:58:25 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:57:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: James M Galvin
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-reply-to: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
X-X-Sender: galvin@three.elistx.com
To: Byron Lunz
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Message-id:
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/3
X-Sequence-Number: 247
More generally, I see this a lot from Microsoft Exchange users.
There is an obscure anomaly for which users who set the "vacation"
notice feature will cause all messages that have collected since the
notice was set to be resubmitted the moment they login when they get
back from "vacation".
It's pretty easy to detect if you log message-ids of received messages.
This is what I do. Can you say "looping storm"? You only need this to
happen once, on a b-i-g list, to understand why I remove with prejudice
any subscriber who submits duplicate messages.
You can also find them when the envelope from does not match the message
header from.
The resubmitted message will look exactly like the original except that
it will have more Received lines and the envelope from will be the
person with the broken mail system.
Jim
--
James M. Galvin
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Byron Lunz wrote:
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:18 -0700
From: Byron Lunz
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: re-appearing old mail?
Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on discussion lists
(or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)?
I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 or 5 days
ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon investigation, the only
common element I noticed was that each such message had numerous Received:
headers, one of which was from rr.com. Examples from three different messages:
Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53])
Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55])
Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with
It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are regurgitating old
messages, which then are treated as new posts upon arrival at our
mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this problem or know for sure the source
of these mails?
--
Byron Lunz
DataBack Systems LLC
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 11:01:26 2002
Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77821195F45
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 11:01:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40])
by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5FI0hJJ003754;
Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:00:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:00:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Beartooth
X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net
Reply-To: KHLsv
To: Byron Lunz
Cc: "Tom 'Sciuricidus Maximus' Caceci" ,
Earl Perry ,
List Managers
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/4
X-Sequence-Number: 248
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Byron Lunz wrote:
> Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on
> discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their
> inbox)?
Yes, several times, and several posts each time.
> I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4
> or 5 days ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon
> investigation, the only common element I noticed was that each
> such message had numerous Received: headers, one of which was
> from rr.com. Examples from three different messages:
>
> Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53])
> Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55])
> Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with
>
> It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are
> regurgitating old messages, which then are treated as new posts
> upon arrival at our mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this
> problem or know for sure the source of these mails?
The ones I've seen have all been on a private list running
on GNU Mailman; but I'm not the owner. Maybe one of them (in Cc:)
knows whether we have any xyz.rr.com addresses, and will tell us.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 14:10:23 2002
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 863BD195F0E
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 24-205-152-183.riv-dyn.charterpipeline.net ([24.205.152.183] helo=lehel.goldmark.private)
by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2)
id 17JKny-0002dS-00; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:09:54 -0700
Received: from jeffrey (helo=localhost)
by lehel.goldmark.private with local-esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1)
id 17JKnx-0007e4-00; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:09:53 -0700
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:09:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeffrey Goldberg
X-X-Sender: jeffrey@lehel.goldmark.private
Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg
To: James M Galvin
Cc: Byron Lunz ,
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/5
X-Sequence-Number: 249
[mailed and posted]
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, James M Galvin wrote:
> More generally, I see this a lot from Microsoft Exchange users.
>
> There is an obscure anomaly for which users who set the "vacation"
> notice feature will cause all messages that have collected since the
> notice was set to be resubmitted the moment they login when they get
> back from "vacation".
I would like to add this to my rant about broken autoresponders
http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/auto-resp/
Can you provide either more details or pointers to more details.
Thanks,
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/
Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 20:42:20 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E63A195AAE
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 20:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id D198D351E1; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:41:50 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:32:18 -0400
To: Byron Lunz , list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/6
X-Sequence-Number: 250
Yes, from the same general area, and from a particular user on a particular
list. Since I am running Mj2, all of the duplicates were caught because
the headers were too large and because the message IDs were
duplicates. Both of these (by default) cause Mj2 to hold the mail for
approval by the moderator and to try and notify the sending user.
All had the following more or less in common:
This is where they sent it back to me.
Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55]) by
parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600BD103BA4 for
; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 22:43:28 -0400 (EDT)
This seems to be where they bounced it around.
Received: from mail pickup service by mail8.nc.rr.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 22:39:38 -0400
There is a more or less significant delay between the below line and the
one above - I assume that the one above is the reinjection.
Received: from ncmx01.mgw.rr.com ([24.93.67.251]) by mail8.nc.rr.com
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:27:04
-0400
This is their system getting the mail - the same user is always involved
--- the user's id begins with the letter "L",
Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [64.244.111.110]) by
ncmx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5BEKs3o024282 for
; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:20:55 -0400 (EDT)
Constantuser is always the same user, I don't feel free to reveal the
user's complete address or the complete list id so I put in list@listhost.
The origin of the mail is set back to the user in the "From:" line or to
some odd variation of that user.
My belief is that the end user is re-injecting the mail. The mail is going
to the end user, some sort of script is run and then, after minutes or
hours, the mail is reinjected.
I would appreciate knowing if anyone here sees this as a user or server
issue. I see it as a user issue since there is always one user involved
and since the re-injection delay is variable. But knowing it is happening
on multiple other lists is interesting. It only happens with this one user
on one of my lists.
At 08:17 AM 2002-06-15 -0700, Byron Lunz wrote:
>Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on discussion
>lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)?
>
>I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 or 5
>days ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon investigation, the only
>common element I noticed was that each such message had numerous Received:
>headers, one of which was from rr.com. Examples from three different messages:
>
> Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53])
> Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55])
> Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with
>
>It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are regurgitating old
>messages, which then are treated as new posts upon arrival at our
>mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this problem or know for sure the source
>of these mails?
--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 21:01:30 2002
Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833C9195AAE
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-1-8-251.il.sprintbbd.net [66.1.8.251])
by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5G41JO10047
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:01:19 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <002601c214ea$4b5d3e60$fb080142@ord351473>
From: "David W. Tamkin"
To:
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1>
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:59:41 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Archive-Number: 200206/7
X-Sequence-Number: 251
Nick Simicich wrote,
| The origin of the mail is set back to the user in the "From:" line or to
| some odd variation of that user.
|
| My belief is that the end user is re-injecting the mail. The mail is going
| to the end user, some sort of script is run and then, after minutes or
| hours, the mail is reinjected.
About three or four years ago I saw the same thing happening on two lists
running on eGroups (before it became Yahoo Groups). The messages were not
redistributed but rather bounced because the list's Mailing-List: or
X-Mailing-List: (whichever it was then) header was already present; however,
the reinjecter had reset From_ to match From:, so they were bounced to their
original authors. In both cases, the offender had a personal domain connected
through the bouncing system and there was no member at an address in the
bouncing system's domain. By running nslookup -q=any on the domains of all
members, I helped both listowners find the culprits. One was probably
malicious, the other may have been a stupid misconfiguration.
All I can say is the obvious: kick the culprit off the list and reserve
judgment about the provider unless there are future incidents from other
members in that domain.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 21:42:32 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 151BA195AAE
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C34351D9
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:42:04 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020616003940.097ce910@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:41:25 -0400
To:
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To:
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/8
X-Sequence-Number: 252
This also happened on spam-l were someone picked out some of the bouncing
headers:
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
release 1.8e) with spool id 20707028 for
SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM;
Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:45:09 -0400
Received: from 24.93.67.53 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with
TCP; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:45:09 -0400
Received: from mail pickup service by mail6.triad.rr.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 02:22:28 -0400
Received: from flmx01.mgw.rr.com ([65.32.1.38]) by mail6.triad.rr.com with
Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:34:49 -0400
Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by
flmx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5ALYmUa020119 for
; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:34:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com
(LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id
<20.00643BA7@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:32:16 -0400
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
release 1.8e) with spool id 20701390 for
SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM;
Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:45:40 -0400
Received: from 24.93.67.53 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with
TCP; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:45:40 -0400
Received: from mail pickup service by mail6.triad.rr.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 02:18:12 -0400
Received: from ncmx01.mgw.rr.com ([24.93.67.251]) by mail6.triad.rr.com with
Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:58:20 -0400
Received: from suite.net ([207.227.89.66]) by ncmx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2)
with SMTP id g5AFwJtH020986 for ; Mon, 10 Jun
2002 11:58:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 30389 invoked by uid 7797); 10 Jun 2002 15:57:17 -0000
Delivered-To: mac-do1137-SPAML@R58.ORG
Received: (qmail 30386 invoked by uid 0); 10 Jun 2002 15:57:17 -0000
Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (209.119.0.109) by ns2.suite.net with
SMTP; 10 Jun 2002 15:57:17 -0000
At 02:09 PM 2002-06-15 -0700, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>[mailed and posted]
>
>On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, James M Galvin wrote:
>
>
> > More generally, I see this a lot from Microsoft Exchange users.
> >
> > There is an obscure anomaly for which users who set the "vacation"
> > notice feature will cause all messages that have collected since the
> > notice was set to be resubmitted the moment they login when they get
> > back from "vacation".
>
>I would like to add this to my rant about broken autoresponders
>
> http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/auto-resp/
>
>Can you provide either more details or pointers to more details.
>
>Thanks,
>
>-j
>
>
>--
>Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/
>Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice
--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 21:49:58 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030BD195AAE
for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id BE74D351DD; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:49:30 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020616004422.132ac238@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:49:27 -0400
To: abuse@rr.com, postmaster@rr.com,
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To: <002601c214ea$4b5d3e60$fb080142@ord351473>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/9
X-Sequence-Number: 253
At 10:59 PM 2002-06-15 -0500, David W. Tamkin wrote:
>Nick Simicich wrote,
>
>| The origin of the mail is set back to the user in the "From:" line or to
>| some odd variation of that user.
>|
>| My belief is that the end user is re-injecting the mail. The mail is going
>| to the end user, some sort of script is run and then, after minutes or
>| hours, the mail is reinjected.
>
>About three or four years ago I saw the same thing happening on two lists
>running on eGroups (before it became Yahoo Groups). The messages were not
>redistributed but rather bounced because the list's Mailing-List: or
>X-Mailing-List: (whichever it was then) header was already present; however,
>the reinjecter had reset From_ to match From:, so they were bounced to their
>original authors.
When I thought it was only one person and only one list, I assumed that it
was the user. I think I was wrong. It is happening all over and the common
point is rr.com.
[...]
>All I can say is the obvious: kick the culprit off the list and reserve
>judgment about the provider unless there are future incidents from other
>members in that domain.
The problem is that this is suddenly happening to a lot of southeast rr.com
addresses - on my list, on spam-l, to other people here, and so forth. It
is beginning to seem like it is an ISP issue, and it is not at all clear
what the ISP would be doing, reinjecting the mail with a bad mail from:<>
nor why they are doing this suddenly for a range of users.
It does seem we should be copying abuse@rr.com and postmaster@rr.com in the
hope that they will fix their problem.
--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 06:57:41 2002
Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D97195F7B
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 06:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-1-8-251.il.sprintbbd.net [66.1.8.251])
by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5GDvaO29820
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:57:37 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <002f01c2153d$ad17c640$fb080142@ord351473>
From: "David W. Tamkin"
To:
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> <5.1.0.14.2.20020616004422.132ac238@127.0.0.1>
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:46:41 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Archive-Number: 200206/10
X-Sequence-Number: 254
Nick followed up,
| The problem is that this is suddenly happening to a lot of southeast rr.com
| addresses - on my list, on spam-l, to other people here, and so forth. It
| is beginning to seem like it is an ISP issue, and it is not at all clear
| what the ISP would be doing, reinjecting the mail with a bad mail from:<>
| nor why they are doing this suddenly for a range of users.
I had several situations on the last list I ran where I banned a domain. None
of the subscribers with addresses in the banned domains were at fault; in N-1
cases it was flaky MTA setups that I was sick of dealing with, and the other
was an ISP who had done something so horrible to me personally that I decided
that their customers' experiences on that ISP should not benefit from my
efforts to manage and moderate the list. (For that last one I did not tell
the subscribers why I would no longer send the list to their domain.)
Most weren't interested enough to give me other addresses and just quietly let
me close their subscriptions. Some gave me other addresses. Predictably,
nobody proactively unsubbed. I expected that some who didn't reply (despite
thirty-day, fifteen-day, and seven-day notices) would write a couple months
later to ask what happened to the list, but none did ... for those situations.
I had that last happen in another story, which did not involve banning a
domain.
| It does seem we should be copying abuse@rr.com and postmaster@rr.com in the
| hope that they will fix their problem.
Perhaps Road Runner will do something (but aren't they owned by AOL?); in the
meantime, I wouldn't blame any affected listadmin from suspending all
subscriptions to rr.com addresses and inviting those members to receive the
list elsewhere.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 07:20:40 2002
Received: from mail.goes.com (mail.goes.com [208.208.69.5])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06478195ACD
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 07:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oemcomputer (a236.goes.com [63.76.36.236])
by mail.goes.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g5GEK5w69247;
Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:20:05 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <003601c21541$6bfb8b20$ec244c3f@oemcomputer>
From: "wayfarer"
To: "David W. Tamkin" ,
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> <5.1.0.14.2.20020616004422.132ac238@127.0.0.1> <002f01c2153d$ad17c640$fb080142@ord351473>
Subject: newbe
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:23:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Archive-Number: 200206/11
X-Sequence-Number: 255
I am new and not tech orientated. I am about to start a list so I joined
this one in order to get some knowledge. If my questions seem amateurish. it
is because I am an amateur. If my questions are to amateurish tell me and I
will leave
"irreverence is a virtue, disrespect is a sin"
wayfayer tomm
join http:// www.communicationinstitute.com for free
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 20:07:25 2002
Received: from yertle.kciLink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [216.194.193.105])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DADB5195AC4
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 20:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yertle.kciLink.com (Postfix, from userid 100)
id 873932178B; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:06:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Vivek Khera
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15629.21067.407855.861583@yertle.kciLink.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:06:51 -0400
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
References: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid
X-Archive-Number: 200206/12
X-Sequence-Number: 256
>>>>> "BL" == Byron Lunz writes:
BL> Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on
BL> discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their
BL> inbox)?
The usual cause I've experienced is some broken mail system that uses
the "To:" header (not the SMTP envelope recipient) to deliver the
mail. When it sees the list address it just re-sends the message to
the list. Usually these types of systems hide behind a single ISP
email account and then "burst" the messages to their local users based
on the "To" header. Obviously, it is very easy to write broken
software, and the rest of the world gets to suffer.
The quick fix is to track down the offending address and remove it
from your list.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc.
Internet: khera@kciLink.com Rockville, MD +1-240-453-8497
AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 21:06:07 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904AC1959EC
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:06:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 4F2E4351DD; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:05:33 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020616235807.227ab8b0@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:03:13 -0400
To: Vivek Khera , list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail?
In-Reply-To: <15629.21067.407855.861583@yertle.kciLink.com>
References: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
<5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/13
X-Sequence-Number: 257
At 11:06 PM 2002-06-16 -0400, Vivek Khera wrote:
> >>>>> "BL" == Byron Lunz writes:
>
>BL> Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on
>BL> discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their
>BL> inbox)?
>
>The usual cause I've experienced is some broken mail system that uses
>the "To:" header (not the SMTP envelope recipient) to deliver the
>mail. When it sees the list address it just re-sends the message to
>the list. Usually these types of systems hide behind a single ISP
>email account and then "burst" the messages to their local users based
>on the "To" header. Obviously, it is very easy to write broken
>software, and the rest of the world gets to suffer.
Unless this is a policy suddenly taken up by a large number of people at
rr.com, I doubt it is the case this time. Do these systems also
reconstitute the "Mail From:<>" addresses as well?
>The quick fix is to track down the offending address and remove it
>from your list.
Well, I can understand that if that was what was happening. I might even
be tempted to do that in this case.
--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 21:36:18 2002
Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95857195AC7
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78AEB630D
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:33:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Michael S. Johnson"
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
Message-ID:
X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/14
X-Sequence-Number: 258
Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
request that it define one. I've tried to turn on the subject prefix for
my subscription to this list, but messsages to the list that I have
received since then do not carry a subject prefix.
Here are my current settings as reported by majordomo@greatcircle.com:
Receiving each message as it is posted
Subscriber flags:
noeliminatecc
nohide
nohidepost
nopostblock
prefix
...
I have already tried asking the list owner, but have not received a
response. Adding subject prefix to messages from this list would greatly
help with identifying mail from this list in my mailbox. Just in case,
let me say now that I am not interested in suggestions to change my MUA.
:)
--
Thank you,
Michael
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:03:12 2002
Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8EA1959EC
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.81.78.186] (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186])
by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5H51nt22081;
Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:01:49 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:01:43 -0700
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
From: Chuq Von Rospach
To: "Michael S. Johnson" ,
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archive-Number: 200206/15
X-Sequence-Number: 259
On 6/16/02 9:35 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote:
> Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
> request that it define one.
And if you do, I'll probably leave. Learn to use filters, don=B9t force the
system to muck with the subject line to do something only a small percentage
of list users want.
--=20
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/
No! No! Dead girl, OFF the table! -- Shrek
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:06:45 2002
Received: from tom.iecc.com (tom.iecc.com [208.31.42.38])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DFD31959EC
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 19517 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2002 01:06:17 -0400
Received: (ofmipd 208.31.42.38); 17 Jun 2002 05:05:55 -0000
Date: 17 Jun 2002 01:06:17 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "John R Levine"
To: "Chuq Von Rospach"
Cc: "list-managers@greatcircle.com"
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/16
X-Sequence-Number: 260
> > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
> > request that it define one.
>
> And if you do, I'll probably leave.
MJ2 makes the subject prefix a per-subscriber option. If Brent defines
one, you only get it if you send "set list-managers prefix" to majordomo.
I think prefixes are pretty lame, too, but they're not as lame as some of
the MUAs that can't filter on header lines other than To, From, and
Subject.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner
"Just how much hay did we buy?" asked Tom, balefully.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:21:30 2002
Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648EC195ABF
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A8CB628F
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:19:19 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:20:39 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Michael S. Johnson"
To: "list-managers@greatcircle.com"
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/17
X-Sequence-Number: 261
On 17 Jun 2002, John R Levine wrote:
> > > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
> > > request that it define one.
> >
> > And if you do, I'll probably leave.
As John Levine points out, a subject prefix is not something that everyone
is forced to receive. I'm asking that one be defined so that it becomes
easier to scan my inbox visually for messages from this list. All of the
other lists I subscribe to support this feature, and it adds value to my
mail-reading experience, regardless of the MUA I use.
> I think prefixes are pretty lame, too, but they're not as lame as some
> of the MUAs that can't filter on header lines other than To, From, and
> Subject.
My MUA can filter on it, but if I automatically move mail away from my
Inbox to other folders, I forget to read them. Out of sight->out of mind.
That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to
suggest an MUA that solves that problem? :)
Otherwise, why be such a grouch about it?
--
Michael
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:38:07 2002
Received: from [10.0.1.6] (adsl-89-209.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.209.89])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 5DC69195ABF; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References:
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:37:36 +1000
To: "Michael S. Johnson" ,
"list-managers@greatcircle.com"
From: Brent Chapman
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Archive-Number: 200206/18
X-Sequence-Number: 262
At 10:20 PM -0700 6/16/02, Michael S. Johnson wrote:
>On 17 Jun 2002, John R Levine wrote:
>
> > > > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
> > > > request that it define one.
> > >
> > > And if you do, I'll probably leave.
>
>As John Levine points out, a subject prefix is not something that everyone
>is forced to receive. I'm asking that one be defined so that it becomes
>easier to scan my inbox visually for messages from this list. All of the
>other lists I subscribe to support this feature, and it adds value to my
>mail-reading experience, regardless of the MUA I use.
I have now defined it, so that those users who want it can enable it.
Those that don't, like Chuq and myself, can stick with the default,
which disables it.
>
> > I think prefixes are pretty lame, too, but they're not as lame as some
> > of the MUAs that can't filter on header lines other than To, From, and
> > Subject.
>
>My MUA can filter on it, but if I automatically move mail away from my
>Inbox to other folders, I forget to read them. Out of sight->out of mind.
>That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to
>suggest an MUA that solves that problem? :)
>
>Otherwise, why be such a grouch about it?
Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-)
-Brent
--
Brent Chapman
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:39:52 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72C89195AB4
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA30351DD
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:39:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020617011311.2316dd48@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:38:39 -0400
To:
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To:
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Archive-Number: 200206/19
X-Sequence-Number: 263
At 10:01 PM 2002-06-16 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>On 6/16/02 9:35 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote:
>
> > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
> > request that it define one.
>
>And if you do, I'll probably leave. Learn to use filters, donšt force the
>system to muck with the subject line to do something only a small percentage
>of list users want.
The joy of Majordomo2, which this list is apparently being run under based
on the flags reported (I just verified it), is that subject prefixes and
reply-to are an individual option (overridable, of course, based on site
preference, but if a user likes reply-to or subject prefixes they can set
them). Defining the subject prefix does not force it down your throat. It
just allows those who want one to get one.
The default subject prefix is [listname], in this case [list-managers]. I
have no idea if they have set this to null because they have some religious
opposition. I see that they are offering three kinds of digests so they
are probably not completely into doing all splitting in the MTA.
And, yes, that means that if the list has all combinations of users set,
that there will be a message dropped into the MTA for those who want
neither reply-to nor subject prefix, one for the both crowd, one for the
reply to but not subject prefix group and one for the subject prefix and no
reply-to group. It works real well.
http://www.greatcircle.com/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=greatcircle.com
Is the management URL for users, by the way. I had to guess at it. Do a
"forgot my password" and confirm, and then you can set your options as you
choose.
--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:44:37 2002
Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D1E1959EC
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37AEB628F
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:42:35 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:00 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Michael S. Johnson"
To: "list-managers@greatcircle.com"
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/20
X-Sequence-Number: 264
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Brent Chapman wrote:
> I have now defined it, so that those users who want it can enable it.
Thank you, much appreciated. I look forward to receiving my message
echoed back with a subject prefix.
> Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-)
Oh, the humanity! Curling's over, too, isn't it? Love that game.
Cracks me up.
--
Michael
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:45:56 2002
Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 496BA196032; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.81.78.186] (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186])
by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5H5itt22731;
Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:55 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:49 -0700
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
From: Chuq Von Rospach
To: Brent Chapman ,
"Michael S. Johnson" ,
"list-managers@greatcircle.com"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200206/21
X-Sequence-Number: 265
On 6/16/02 10:37 PM, "Brent Chapman" wrote:
> I have now defined it, so that those users who want it can enable it.
> Those that don't, like Chuq and myself, can stick with the default,
> which disables it.
Fair enough. I don't care if others want it. I do care if they feel they can
force it on those that don't want it because they do.
>> Otherwise, why be such a grouch about it?
>
> Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-)
No, it's having fought this fight dozens of times over the years on various
lists, and knowing that every time I survey ALL of the users, and not just
those demanding I add these bloody subject line flags, that the % of users
who actually want it will be under 15% of the total subscribers. But that
15% feels they're preference overrides the much larger group that DOESN'T
want it.
It's a squeaky wheel thing. Like most other humans, list admins don't want
justice, they want quiet. So squeaky wheels tend to get what they squeak
for. And to even the tally, I got squeaky back.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/
He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:11:02 2002
Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34A5195ABF
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.81.78.186] (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186])
by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5H6AIt23009;
Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:10:18 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:10:10 -0700
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
From: Chuq Von Rospach
To: "Michael S. Johnson" ,
"list-managers@greatcircle.com"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200206/22
X-Sequence-Number: 266
On 6/16/02 10:44 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote:
>> Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-)
>
> Oh, the humanity! Curling's over, too, isn't it? Love that game.
> Cracks me up.
Why? Because you don't understand it? (mr. Grumpy happens to be a curling
fan, of course). It ended for the season back in April with the world
championships. It's a great sport, one of the few you can still be
competitive in once you hit middle age.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/
The first rule of holes: If you are in one, stop digging.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:17:54 2002
Received: from [10.0.1.6] (adsl-89-209.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.209.89])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id E6774195FC9; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References:
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:17:23 +1000
To: Chuq Von Rospach ,
"Michael S. Johnson" ,
"list-managers@greatcircle.com"
From: Brent Chapman
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Archive-Number: 200206/23
X-Sequence-Number: 267
At 11:10 PM -0700 6/16/02, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>On 6/16/02 10:44 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote:
> >> Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-)
> >
> > Oh, the humanity! Curling's over, too, isn't it? Love that game.
> > Cracks me up.
>
>Why? Because you don't understand it? (mr. Grumpy happens to be a curling
>fan, of course). It ended for the season back in April with the world
>championships. It's a great sport, one of the few you can still be
>competitive in once you hit middle age.
Emphasis on the word "hit"... Oh, wait a second, were you talking
about curling? ;-)
-Brent
--
Brent Chapman
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:25:00 2002
Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84848195FEB
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 7092512D4; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Michael S. Johnson"
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To: Message from "Michael S. Johnson"
of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 PDT."
References:
X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9
YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\
X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff
X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:24:05 -0700
Message-ID: <1361.1024295045@kanga.nu>
From: J C Lawrence
X-Archive-Number: 200206/24
X-Sequence-Number: 268
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Michael S Johnson wrote:
> Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to
> request that it define one.
Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:27:47 2002
Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01955195FC9
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:27:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 2EBA212D4; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Michael S. Johnson"
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To: Message from "Michael S. Johnson"
of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 PDT."
References:
X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9
YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\
X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff
X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:27:21 -0700
Message-ID: <1390.1024295241@kanga.nu>
From: J C Lawrence
X-Archive-Number: 200206/25
X-Sequence-Number: 269
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Michael S Johnson wrote:
> Just in case, let me say now that I am not interested in suggestions
> to change my MUA. :)
Pine is a perfectly acceptable MUA...
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:49:47 2002
Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E4D0195ACA
for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 21FD5B628F; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 02:47:44 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Michael S. Johnson"
To: J C Lawrence
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To: <1361.1024295045@kanga.nu>
Message-ID:
X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/26
X-Sequence-Number: 270
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, J C Lawrence wrote:
> Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant.
Thank you for that helpful tip. Seeing the list address sometimes in the
To, sometimes in the CC header was unreliable to filter on. I used Pine's
"Participant contains list-managers@greatcircle.com" criterium in an inbox
color rule to identify this list, where "Participant" searches the From,
To, and CC headers instead of requiring the user to define one rule for
each header separately.
--
Michael
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 00:46:52 2002
Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAB41959FD
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:46:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 4100E12D4; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Michael S. Johnson"
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To: Message from "Michael S. Johnson"
of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 PDT."
References:
X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9
YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\
X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff
X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:46:24 -0700
Message-ID: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu>
From: J C Lawrence
X-Archive-Number: 200206/27
X-Sequence-Number: 271
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Michael S Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, J C Lawrence wrote:
>> Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant.
> Thank you for that helpful tip.
Slightly more expanded:
On lists that support RFC 2369, filter by the List-Id header. That's
what its there for. For everything else I've found Sender: to be the
most reliable.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 07:23:14 2002
Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E52195ABF
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 07:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7])
by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA18283;
Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:22:30 -0400
X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com
X-Envelope-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu>
References: Message from "Michael S. Johnson" of
"Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 PDT."
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:18:41 -0400
To: J C Lawrence
From: Charlie Summers
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
X-Archive-Number: 200206/28
X-Sequence-Number: 272
At 3:46 AM -0400 6/17/02, J C Lawrence is rumored to have typed:
> On lists that support RFC 2369, filter by the List-Id header.
Unfurtunately, that ain't a lot of help on _this_ list.
Charlie (who has a question he needs to ask about that specific
of the List-* header fields, but I want to re-read the
RFC first)
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 08:18:32 2002
Received: from mail.rev.net (server02.rev.net [206.67.68.98])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E6F195AFA
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:18:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fantasy (cosell.gva.net [65.164.103.253])
by mail.rev.net (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g5HFHvh28661
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:17:57 -0400
Message-Id: <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net>
From: "Bernie Cosell"
Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:17:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-reply-to:
References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.3.1(snapshot 20020108) (server02.rev.net)
X-Archived: msg.1024327077.moXX2o@server02.rev.net
X-Archive-Number: 200206/29
X-Sequence-Number: 273
On 17 Jun 2002, at 10:18, Charlie Summers wrote:
> At 3:46 AM -0400 6/17/02, J C Lawrence is rumored to have typed:
>
> > On lists that support RFC 2369, filter by the List-Id header.
>
> Unfurtunately, that ain't a lot of help on _this_ list.
Right, but between List-Id and Sender, that gets just about every list
*i've* seen in a fairly long time. Any of you run into lists whose MLM
uses _neither_ sender nor list-id??
But of course, *neither* of those is of any use for folks who inflict OE
on themselves -- a meta question: Is there *any*other* mail client that
_cannot_ filter on those headers? OE is the only one I know of, but
there are undoubtedly more, I suppose...
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from dattier@localhost)
by pop2a.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id g5HFWnt04531
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:32:49 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <200206171532.g5HFWnt04531@pop2a.ripco.com>
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (list-managers@greatcircle.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:32:49 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: from "Chuq Von Rospach" at Jun 16, 2002 10:44:49 PM
From: "David W. Tamkin"
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200206/30
X-Sequence-Number: 274
Chuq wrote,
> Fair enough. I don't care if others want it. I do care if they feel they can
> force it on those that don't want it because they do.
Michael, your contentment with getting it on his own copies is refreshing.
In my experiences, not only have all those who proposed tagging opened the
subject by demanding that it be the law of the list, but they've been
noticeably disappointed to learn it was an option and that the rest of the
list would continue to survive without it. They had to face up to its being
a personal preference and not the superior way.
I swear you're the first one I've ever seen actually walk away satisfied with
getting tags on his own copies instead of acting deflated and defeated be-
cause they wouldn't be forced on everybody else.
Michael wrote,
| My MUA can filter on it, but if I automatically move mail away from my
| Inbox to other folders, I forget to read them. Out of sight->out of mind.
If the list software didn't support it as an option, the solution to that is
to set up a filter that catches your incoming copies of the list's distribu-
tions by the Sender: header and then adds the tag. Heck, that's how I remove
the tags from my copies of posts from lists that insert them on all posts.
| That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to
| suggest an MUA that solves that problem?
Surely there are MUAs that call one's attention to new mail in other folders.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 08:38:58 2002
Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00798195F8D
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7])
by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA26048;
Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:38:24 -0400
X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com
X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net>
References:
<2305.1024299984@kanga.nu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:38:53 -0400
To: "Bernie Cosell" ,
list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Charlie Summers
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
X-Archive-Number: 200206/31
X-Sequence-Number: 275
At 11:17 AM -0400 6/17/02, Bernie Cosell is rumored to have typed:
> But of course, *neither* of those is of any use for folks who inflict OE
> on themselves -- a meta question: Is there *any*other* mail client that
> _cannot_ filter on those headers? OE is the only one I know of, but
> there are undoubtedly more, I suppose...
Um...please understand, I cannot stand OE. And I cannot speak to the
Windoze version of the thing, but I _have_ installed/configured the Macintosh
version (5.02), and it _can_ filter on arbitrary header fields.
Under the Tools menu, select Rules. Create a new rule, name it. Under the
pop-up, select either "Specific Header" and fill in the header field name, or
select "Any Header"; either way, fill in the contents of, say, the list's
List-ID: header field, and in the "Action" box, tell it what to do with the
message (move it, copy it, eat it, whatever). Make sure it's Enabled, and
close the Rule and then the Rules window.
Unlike Eudora (at least the old 3.1 I intentionally use to avoid HTML,
javascript, OLE...er...ActiveX, etc., etc.), it doesn't open windows for
those "folders" it transfers things into, but it does enbolden the folder
name.
I would _never_ recommend OE to anyone (I think it's clunky, stilted, and
has less features and more security risks than an email application from
1997), but in fairness, at least in the Macintosh version, it CAN filter on
arbitrary header fields.
Charlie
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 09:05:12 2002
Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5AD195AFA
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:05:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-1-8-251.il.sprintbbd.net [66.1.8.251])
by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5HG4LO04764
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:04:31 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <002601c21618$a48faa20$fb080142@ord351473>
From: "David W. Tamkin"
To:
References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu>
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:03:45 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Archive-Number: 200206/32
X-Sequence-Number: 276
Charlie wrote,
| Um...please understand, I cannot stand OE. And I cannot speak to the
| Windoze version of the thing, but I _have_ installed/configured the
| Macintosh version (5.02), and it _can_ filter on arbitrary header fields.
Outlook Express for Windows cannot; this is version 6.0, and I started with
4.something, which couldn't either, nor could 5.0 or 5.5.
My personal solution is to receive mail from lists at shell accounts, where
procmail drops them into folders that OE reads via IMAP.
Before anyone attacks me for using OE at all, I started using it because it
was *there*, and by now I'm too entrenched for a change to be easy, and I've
yet to see anything where the potential improvement over OE is worth the
learning curve plus the adjustment. But I am not championing it nor even
defending it.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 09:12:16 2002
Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D946195AFA
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7])
by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA28393;
Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:11:46 -0400
X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com
X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <200206171532.g5HFWnt04531@pop2a.ripco.com>
References: from "Chuq Von Rospach"
at Jun 16, 2002 10:44:49 PM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:04:01 -0400
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (list-managers@greatcircle.com)
From: Charlie Summers
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
X-Archive-Number: 200206/33
X-Sequence-Number: 277
At 11:32 AM -0400 6/17/02, David W. Tamkin is rumored to have typed:
> Surely there are MUAs that call one's attention to new mail in other folders.
Yup; Eudora Pro 3.1 (from 1997) for Macintosh opens each "mailbox" (I
know, it's a misnomer, but so is "folder") it transfers mail into after a
retrieve. My desktop doesn't look so very good in the mornings... ;)
Charlie
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 09:22:54 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3762195ABF
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:22:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BE9B351DE
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:22:26 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020617120117.03f18680@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:04:13 -0400
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for
In-Reply-To: <1361.1024295045@kanga.nu>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/34
X-Sequence-Number: 278
At 11:24 PM 2002-06-16 -0700, J C Lawrence wrote:
>Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant.
Not if they use all of the mj2 features. Built in verp, y-know.
Hmmmm....according to my settings, I have set prefix, I just double
checked, but I see no prefixes...
--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 10:39:02 2002
Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.13.23])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B727195AAD
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 13845 invoked by uid 50); 17 Jun 2002 17:38:34 -0000
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu>
<200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net>
In-Reply-To: <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net> ("Bernie Cosell"'s
message of "Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:17:56 -0400")
From: Russ Allbery
Organization: The Eyrie
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:38:34 -0700
Message-ID:
Lines: 12
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090005 (Oort Gnus v0.05) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp,
sparc-sun-solaris2.6)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Archive-Number: 200206/35
X-Sequence-Number: 279
Bernie Cosell writes:
> Right, but between List-Id and Sender, that gets just about every list
> *i've* seen in a fairly long time. Any of you run into lists whose MLM
> uses _neither_ sender nor list-id??
Not run, but I've seen them. Checking my sorting rules, I occasionally
use Mailing-List (pure ezmlm, not ezmlm-idx, mailing lists) and X-Loop,
and once in a while Return-Path.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 10:40:04 2002
Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B2A195AED
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 6A8EFB621A; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:37:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:39:28 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Michael S. Johnson"
To: Nick Simicich
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020617120117.03f18680@127.0.0.1>
Message-ID:
X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/36
X-Sequence-Number: 280
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Nick Simicich wrote:
> Hmmmm....according to my settings, I have set prefix, I just double
> checked, but I see no prefixes...
Ah, that would be because the list prefix is not surrounded by [square
brackets]. The convention on other lists is to enclose the subject prefix
in [square brackets], but this list does not. It was probably just an
oversight. I do see the text "List-Managers" near the beginning of each
message subject now, after the "Re: " prefix if there is one.
For example with this message, for those with set prefix turned on:
* Current: "Re: List-Managers Subject prefix for"
* Desired: "Re: [List-Managers] Subject prefix for"
Brent, may I ask for this small correction, please?
--
Much appreciated,
Michael
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 10:55:36 2002
Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD72D195AED
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27])
by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id F0968B633F; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:53:28 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:55:01 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Michael S. Johnson"
To: "David W. Tamkin"
Cc: "list-managers@greatcircle.com"
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
In-Reply-To: <200206171532.g5HFWnt04531@pop2a.ripco.com>
Message-ID:
X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/37
X-Sequence-Number: 281
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, David W. Tamkin wrote:
> Michael, your contentment with getting it on his own copies is refreshing.
Thank you. There was never any intent to enforce the subject prefix on
all subscribers. It is unfortunate that prominent list personalities
misunderstood my request in that way. Chuq and I have reached an
understanding and have declared a truce. :)
I run a list or two, so I am sensitive to that issue. I researched the
prefix setting by first requesting help documents from the Majordomo
server. Because the documentation shows that it is a per-user setting,
there didn't seem to be any harm in setting the feature, noticing that it
didn't work, realizing that it probably was not defined for the list, then
asking the list owner to define one.
When I didn't hear back from the list owner, I thought it might be a
policy issue, so I made the request here on the list, figuring that either
a list co-owner would step up to the task, or that people who knew better
would be able to enlighten me as to why there was no subject prefix.
Although I now see that I should have, I didn't think that a list of list
owners would require me to pad my request with assurances that my request
would not negatively impact *their* experience on this list, and would not
seek to enforce changes to *all* subscribers. Frankly, I thought this
list was more mature and knowledgable about that sort of thing, given the
authoritative posture of many of the frequent participants.
> If the list software didn't support it as an option, the solution to
> that is to set up a filter that catches your incoming copies of the
> list's distribu- tions by the Sender: header and then adds the tag.
My MUA (PC-Pine) does not support altering the content of messages in the
way you describe. Yes, your suggestion is certainly worth implementing if
it could.
> | That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to
> | suggest an MUA that solves that problem?
>
> Surely there are MUAs that call one's attention to new mail in other folders.
Yes, there are. Outlook and Outlook Express are two of them. I use both
for other purposes, but I use Pine because I have almost 10 years of
mailbox archives in that plaintext format. If I started using Outlook or
OE for my daily non-work mail, I would then have two incompatible data
stores - one would not be able to search the other.
--
Michael
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 11:49:43 2002
Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC30195F3B
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:49:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from root@localhost)
by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) id g5HIn4336163
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:49:04 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from tom-w2kc (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g5HIn3U36093
for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:49:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:49:10 -0400
From: Tom Neff
Reply-To: tneff@grassyhill.org
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
Message-ID: <58208703.1024325350@[192.168.0.1]>
In-Reply-To: <002601c21618$a48faa20$fb080142@ord351473>
References: <002601c21618$a48faa20$fb080142@ord351473>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Win32)
Organization: Grassy Hill Entertainment
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Scanner: scanned by Inflex 1.0.12.3 - http://pldaniels.com/inflex
X-Archive-Number: 200206/38
X-Sequence-Number: 282
--On Monday, June 17, 2002 11:03 AM -0500 "David W. Tamkin"
wrote:
> My personal solution is to receive mail from lists at shell accounts,
> where procmail drops them into folders that OE reads via IMAP.
>
> Before anyone attacks me for using OE at all, I started using it because
> it was *there*, and by now I'm too entrenched for a change to be easy,
> and I've yet to see anything where the potential improvement over OE is
> worth the learning curve plus the adjustment. But I am not championing
> it nor even defending it.
Respectfully -- if all you're doing is reading IMAP folders hosted on an
external server, the learning curve in switching to something decent like
Mulberry or Mozilla Mail is almost nonexistent. And you'll be protected
from the cavalcade of MS security holes. That alone is worth the switch.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 15:43:27 2002
Received: from [10.0.1.6] (adsl-105-209.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.209.105])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id BE95D195F3C; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References:
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 08:42:55 +1000
To: "Michael S. Johnson" ,
Nick Simicich
From: Brent Chapman
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Archive-Number: 200206/39
X-Sequence-Number: 283
At 10:39 AM -0700 6/17/02, Michael S. Johnson wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Nick Simicich wrote:
> > Hmmmm....according to my settings, I have set prefix, I just double
> > checked, but I see no prefixes...
>
>Ah, that would be because the list prefix is not surrounded by [square
>brackets]. The convention on other lists is to enclose the subject prefix
>in [square brackets], but this list does not. It was probably just an
>oversight. I do see the text "List-Managers" near the beginning of each
>message subject now, after the "Re: " prefix if there is one.
>
>For example with this message, for those with set prefix turned on:
>
>* Current: "Re: List-Managers Subject prefix for"
>* Desired: "Re: [List-Managers] Subject prefix for"
>
>Brent, may I ask for this small correction, please?
>
>--
>Much appreciated,
>Michael
Oops, sorry, I thought the software would add the square brackets
automatically. Fixed now.
-Brent
--
Brent Chapman
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Jun 20 07:44:45 2002
Received: from mail8.wlv.netzero.net (mail8.wlv.netzero.net [209.247.163.58])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 94BF71959F8
for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 07:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20124 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2002 14:44:07 -0000
Received: from dialup-65.59.82.147.dial1.tampa1.level3.net (HELO netzero.net) (65.59.82.147)
by mail8.wlv.netzero.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2002 14:44:07 -0000
Message-ID: <3D11E540.CD8A97C8@netzero.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 10:22:56 -0400
From: Kirk Bailey
Organization: Silas Dent Memorial Cabal of ERIS Esoteric and hot dog boiling society
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Michael S. Johnson" ,
list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com?
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200206/40
X-Sequence-Number: 284
Hmmm, I could turn it on with a file for each list, and if not found, it
simply reproduces the subject, hmmm.....
"Michael S. Johnson" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Kirk Bailey wrote:
>
> > interesting. I wrote TinyList to always automatically insert
> > '[(listname)]' before the provided subject, and assumed it would aid
> > in the use of list service and facilitate reading and filtering list
> > messages; this thread is providing much useful fodder for
> > consideration.
>
> I'm glad that there are others on the list who find this thread useful
> instead of annoying and threatening to their way of life. ^_^
>
> Thank you for letting me know that it has been of use to you. Making such
> an option user-specific appears to be more desirable than an
> everyone-or-noone feature.
>
> I'm sure you've also thought of this, but inserting the [(listname)]
> prefix in a consistent position in the subject header and avoiding
> duplicates is a big plus.
>
> --
> Michael
--
end
Respectfully,
Kirk D Bailey
+---------------------"Thou Art Free." -Eris-----------------------+
| http://www.howlermonkey.net mailto:highprimate@howlermonkey.net |
| http://www.tinylist.org +--------+ mailto:grumpy@tinylist.org |
+------------------Thinking| NORMAL |Thinking----------------------+
+--------+
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:11:44 2002
Received: from bp.ucs.louisiana.edu (bp.ucs.louisiana.edu [130.70.132.231])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ABFD195AEF
for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from louisiana.edu (h144172.louisiana.edu [130.70.144.172])
by bp.ucs.louisiana.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3/ull-ucs-server_1.6) with ESMTP id g5SKBA125554
for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 15:11:10 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <3D1CC308.7030106@louisiana.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 15:11:52 -0500
From: Istvan Berkeley
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Gorillas at Play
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200206/41
X-Sequence-Number: 285
Hi there,
I just received an unusual bit of spam. It was from msn.com inviting me
to join their system. They even tell me how easy it would be to switch
from my AOL account! Of course, they offer me the option to 'opt out'
from future mailings too!
Now, if the '800 pound gorilla' style ISPs are resorting to spam, what
hope is there that we can ever trust them to enforce sensible anti-spam
policies. Has anyone else seen anything like this?
All the best,
Istvan
--
Istvan S. N. Berkeley, Ph.D. istvan@louisiana.edu
Philosophy and Cognitive Science
The University of Louisiana at Lafayette Tel: (337) 482-6807
P. O. Box 43770, Lafayette Fax: (337) 482-5002
Louisiana, 70504, U.S.A. http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~isb9112
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:19:53 2002
Received: from clifford.inch.com (ns.biglist.com [216.223.208.40])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B900E195B12
for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 52550 invoked by uid 501); 28 Jun 2002 20:19:20 -0000
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:19:20 -0400
From: Omar Thameen
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Verizon postmaster contact?
Message-ID: <20020628161920.A52207@clifford.inch.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
X-Archive-Number: 200206/42
X-Sequence-Number: 286
Anyone have contact info (pref. phone #) for Verizon mail server
issues? They're blocking SMTP connections, presumably because of
the volume we're sending, and I can't get anyone to tell me anything
other than to send email to abuse@verizon.net. I've emailed that
address, as well as postmaster@verizon.net, but have heard nothing.
Please respond privately if you don't want to put it in the archives.
Thanks,
Omar
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:20:05 2002
Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B0061960BD
for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40])
by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5SKJRJU001376;
Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:19:27 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:19:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Beartooth
X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net
Reply-To: KHLsv
To: Istvan Berkeley
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: Gorillas at Play
In-Reply-To: <3D1CC308.7030106@louisiana.edu>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/43
X-Sequence-Number: 287
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Istvan Berkeley wrote:
> Now, if the '800 pound gorilla' style ISPs are resorting to spam,
> what hope is there that we can ever trust them to enforce
> sensible anti-spam policies. Has anyone else seen anything like
> this?
I think so. My first private account in retirement was with
earthlink, and they certainly did it.
--
RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger
double retiree and linux greenhorn
Delenda est MegaSleazo!
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:57:14 2002
Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A198195AEF
for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40])
by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5SKtvJU005883;
Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:56:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:55:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Beartooth
X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net
Reply-To: KHLsv
To: Omar Thameen
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: Verizon postmaster contact?
In-Reply-To: <20020628161920.A52207@clifford.inch.com>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/44
X-Sequence-Number: 288
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Omar Thameen wrote:
> Anyone have contact info (pref. phone #) for Verizon mail server
> issues? They're blocking SMTP connections, presumably because of
> the volume we're sending, and I can't get anyone to tell me anything
> other than to send email to abuse@verizon.net. I've emailed that
> address, as well as postmaster@verizon.net, but have heard nothing.
As a Verizon customer, I can get 0.verizon.linux, and can
usually post to it. Want me to put up the paragraph, saying it's
from a colleague on the list-managers' list?
There are other 0.verizon.foobar groups; I'll try to spot a
better one.
--
RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger
Delenda est MegaSleazo!
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 14:13:13 2002
Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1824195AF0
for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40])
by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5SLCdJU007949;
Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:12:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:12:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Beartooth
X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net
Reply-To: KHLsv
To: List Managers
Cc: Omar Thameen
Subject: Omar, I bet this is relevant!
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200206/45
X-Sequence-Number: 289
On 0.verizon.security, I found a message that seems
relevant to Omar Thameen's problem. I doubt it's forwardable, but
I'll try to copy & paste it here, and maybe he can mine it.
Reply-To: "Dennis Dayman [Verizon Online Security Operations]"
From: "Dennis Dayman [Verizon Online Security Operations]"
Newsgroups: 0.verizon.security
References:
<3D1042EF.5CA7066B@someoneelse.com>
<3D1112E8.8D6D66A0@someoneelse.com>
Subject: Re: Does Verizon block some email?????
Lines: 32
Organization: Verizon Online Internet
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 23:36:01 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.180.7.162
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: nwrddc01.gnilink.net 1024529761 199.180.7.162 (Wed, 19 Jun
2002 19:36:01 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:36:01 EDT
Xref: cyclone1.gnilink.net 0.verizon.security:775
X-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:36:01 EDT
(nwrddc01.gnilink.net)
I am in talks with TOPICA at this time. We are working
on a temporary solution this week and hopefully after
this week a more permanent solution by next Friday.
--
------------------------------- Dennis Dayman
Verizon Online Security Operations
vz.security@verizon.net
"HiEv" wrote in message
news:3D1112E8.8D6D66A0@someoneelse.com...
> Weldon Wallick wrote:
> > Yes, it is Topica!!!
> >
> > What the hell is the big idea???????
>
> Well, Scott couldn't be very specific. He just said
> (on 6/11) that they had talked to Topica and there
> was something they could do (or not do) so they
> wouldn't be counted as spammers anymore, and if they
> did that then the problem should be solved in two
> months or so.
>
> See the thread I pointed you to earlier if you want
> to see his exact words.
>
NB : the thread in question, for any who can get to
0.verizon.anything, is:
>It wouldn't happen to be Topica would it? You might
>want to check the "Verizon and Topica" thread in
>0.verizon.adsl to see what's going on there even if
>it's not the Topica mailing list.
>
>They are probably being excluded as spam.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 09:02:47 2002
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9261959E9
for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 45ED3351D9; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:02:10 -0400 (EDT)
X-America-Has-Resolve: yes
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now!
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 03:51:22 -0400
To: List Managers
From: Nick Simicich
Subject: Re: Omar, I bet this is relevant!
Cc: Omar Thameen
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Archive-Number: 200206/46
X-Sequence-Number: 290
Topica is in the process of being added to a number of blocklists, and I am
unsure if this is the issue at Verizon. (At least, this is the way I
interpret the discussion on SPAM-L). If there was a bounce available,
seeing it might help. Feel free to e-mail it to me privately.
However, there may well be some escalation blacklisting regarding
topica. They have had some large number of lists with spamtrap addresses
signed up onto their service and they have not vetted them well. They also
have some subsidiary who is more, shall we say, oriented to delivering less
solicited mail, and that subsidiary delivers from the same servers.
So, if I was looking for uninterrupted service and my mailing list was
actually opt-in, I would go
elsewhere for mailing list service.
At 05:12 PM 2002-06-28 -0400, Beartooth wrote:
> On 0.verizon.security, I found a message that seems
>relevant to Omar Thameen's problem. I doubt it's forwardable, but
>I'll try to copy & paste it here, and maybe he can mine it.
>
>Reply-To: "Dennis Dayman [Verizon Online Security Operations]"
>--
War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the
exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 09:21:53 2002
Received: from firehouse.net (dsl-64-130-18-61.telocity.com [64.130.18.61])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9130E1959E9
for